4.7 Article

Adsorption of methylene blue on biochar microparticles derived from different waste materials

Journal

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Volume 49, Issue -, Pages 537-544

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.01.015

Keywords

Biochar; Adsorption; Microparticles; Methylene blue; Waste material

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [355254]
  2. Ministere des Relations internationales du Quebec

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biochar microparticles were prepared from three different types of biochar, derived from waste materials, such as pine wood (BC-PW), pig manure (BC -PM) and cardboard (BC-PD) under various pyrolysis conditions. The microparticles were prepared by dry grinding and sequential sieving through various ASTM sieves. Particle size and specific surface area were analyzed using laser particle size analyzer. The particles were further characterized using scanning electron microscope (SEM). The adsorption capacity of each class of adsorbent was determined by methylene blue adsorption tests in comparison with commercially available activated carbon. Experimental results showed that dye adsorption increased with initial concentration of the adsorbate and biochar dosage. Biochar microparticles prepared from different sources exhibited improvement in adsorption capacity (7.8 +/- 0.5 mg g(-1) to 25 +/- 1.3 mg g(-1)) in comparison with raw biochar and commercially available activated carbon. The adsorption capacity varied with source material and method of production of biochar. The maximum adsorption capacity was 25 mg g(-1) for BC-PM microparticles at 25 degrees C for an adsorbate concentration of 500 mg L-1 in comparison with 48.30 +/- 3.6 mg g(-1) for activated carbon. The equilibrium adsorption data were best described by Langmuir model for BC -PM and BC -PD and Freundlich model for BC-PW. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available